Allowed

Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. v. Sanjay Kakade

Delhi HC2 Sept 2025ARB.P./1326/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Delhi High Court appointed a former Acting Chief Justice as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate a loan dispute, as parties failed to agree on a name, subject to prior issuance of notice. The respondent admitted the arbitration clause but contested the claim's merit.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Ms. Sabina as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate disputes between the parties under the aegis of DIAC.

Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. Vs Sanjay Kakade — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~57

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 1326/2025

¶4

INDIABULLS ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Ankit Banati, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

SANJAY KAKADE .....Respondent Through: Ms. Apurva, Mr. Brij Kishor Sah and Mr. Shivaji M. Jadhav, Advocates.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

¶10

% 02.09.2025

¶11

I.A. 21058/2025 (Exemption)

¶12

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶13

Application stands disposed of.

¶14

ARB.P. 1326/2025

¶15

This petition is filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Section 11(5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘1996 Act’) for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator.

¶16

The disputes between the parties arise out of a Loan Agreement dated 19.01.2021 executed between Dhani Loans and Services Limited (earlier Indiabulls Consumer Finance Limited) and the Respondent, whereby Respondent was granted a loan facility of Rs. 10 crores by the Petitioner. It is Petitioner’s case that the entire amount of Rs. 10 crores was disbursed to the Respondent, however, Respondent defaulted in payment of the EMIs

¶17

ARB.P. 1326/2025

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/09/2025 at 11:49:41

¶20

despite reminders and therefore, the Loan Agreement was terminated on 05.02.2023. The entire loan was assigned to the Petitioner by Dhani Loans and Services Limited, including all rights, title and interest with respect to financial assistance/loans, secured assets, guarantees and any other underlying security interest vide Assignment Agreement dated 29.03.2023.

¶21

It is urged on behalf of the Petitioner that till date, the outstanding loan amount has not been paid by the Respondent. On 03.06.2025, Petitioner sent a demand-cum-notice invoking arbitration to the Respondent under Section 21 of 1996 Act, which was served on the Respondent through e-mail on 03.06.2025 and through Speed Post on 19.06.2025. On 21.07.2025, Respondent replied to the notice and albeit it denied the outstanding amount, existence of the arbitration agreement in the Loan Agreement was not denied and in fact, Respondent proposed three names for appointment of the Arbitrator. However, parties could not arrive at a consensus on the name of the Arbitrator and hence, this Court may appoint a Sole Arbitrator.

¶22

Issue notice.

¶23

Ms. Apurva, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the Respondent and candidly submits, on instructions, that existence of Arbitration Clause 21 in the Loan Agreement is not disputed and the Court may appoint an Arbitrator albeit Respondent disputes the claims of the Petitioner on merits.

¶24

Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, Ms. Justice Sabina, former Acting Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High Court (Mobile No. 9780008138) is appointed as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. Arbitral proceedings will be held under the aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre (‘DIAC’). Fee of the Arbitrator shall

ARB.P. 1326/2025

Page 2 of 3

be fixed as per fee schedule under DIAC (Administrative Cost & Arbitrators’ Fees) Rules 2018.

¶29

Learned Arbitrator shall give disclosure under Section 12 of the 1996 Act before entering upon reference.

¶30

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and all rights and contentions of the respective parties are left open

¶31

Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶32

JYOTI SINGH, J

¶33

SEPTEMBER 2, 2025 Ch

¶34

ARB.P. 1326/2025

¶35

Page 3 of 3

¶36

This is a digitally signed order.

¶37

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/09/2025 at 11:49:41

Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. v. Sanjay Kakade

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. v. Sanjay Kakade

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jpfl Films Private Limited Vs Avaada Energy Private Limited & Anr.

Fleur Hotels Limited Formerly Known as Fleur Hotels Private Limited Vs M/S Hind Inns and Hotels Ltd. and Ors.

Jpfl Films Private Limited Vs Avaada Energy Private Limited & Anr.

Lendswap Technology Private Limited Vs Safety Traders Private Limited

M/S Bareilly Highway Project Ltd. through Its Resolution Professional Cma Mr Sandeep Goel Vs M/S National Highways Authority of India through Ministry of Road Transport and Highways Governmen

M/S Sarens Heavy Lift India Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Hajee. a. P. Bava and Company Constructions Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.